Chromatic v Westminster: On the State’s Use of Children to Punish the Unchargeable

---

🪞SWANK LOG ENTRY

The Real Abuse

Or, When the Crown Accuses Without Crime and Punishes Through Parenthood

---

Filed: 30 October 2024
Reference Code: SWK-ABUSE-BY-STATE-2024-10
PDF Filename: 2024-10-30_SWANK_Letter_Westminster_WeaponisedSafeguardingAsAbuse.pdf
One-Line Summary: Polly Chromatic calls it what it is: using children to punish their parent when no crime has been committed is abuse — and the State is the perpetrator.

---

I. What Happened

On 30 October 2024, Polly Chromatic (then still writing under her legal name) issued an email to Westminster Children’s Services and their usual entourage of legal bystanders.

Subject: Child abuse
Charge: Weaponised removal of children as retaliation for not being submissive
Tone: Polished fury, with literary rights reserved

Her message: “You use people’s children to hurt them when you can’t charge them with a crime.”

There is no stronger indictment of the contemporary safeguarding regime.

---

II. What the Complaint Establishes

In under 200 words, this email lays bare the operational mechanism behind “child protection”:

• Hospitals and social services are not acting from concern, but from spite

• There is no lawful basis, only interpersonal resentment and performative virtue

• When a mother proves smarter, louder, or more legally prepared, the system retaliates through her children

• This isn’t safeguarding — it’s punishment-by-proxy

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because when a mother says, “That is child abuse,” we take it as sworn testimony.

Because social work in this case has devolved from welfare into warfare — its weapons are case notes, its targets are families, and its victories are measured in silence.

Because no professional with integrity would read this email and respond with anything but shame.

And because the only thing more dangerous than state violence is state violence cloaked in concern.

---

IV. Violations

• Article 8 ECHR – Violent interference in family life with no lawful justification

• Equality Act 2010 – Discriminatory retaliation against a disabled mother

• Malicious Public Misconduct – Abuse of safeguarding frameworks to punish dissent

• Emotional Harm to Children – Deliberate injury through separation, misinformation, and institutional manipulation

• Procedural Fraud – Failure to name a crime while still inflicting punishment

---

V. SWANK’s Position

We consider this message a constitutional document — a rare moment of clarity in the theatre of bureaucratic abuse.

This was not an angry email.
This was an evidentiary submission.
A whistleblowing affidavit.
A postcolonial memo with a mother’s voice and an archivist’s sting.

Polly Chromatic does not confuse justice with obedience. She does not confuse concern with cruelty. And she does not confuse you with anyone she needs to please.

Let the record show: this is not the sound of a woman breaking — it is the sound of a mother diagnosing the State.

---

⚖️ Legal Rights & Archival Footer This Dispatch Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. Every entry is timestamped. Every sentence is jurisdictional. Every structure is protected. This document does not contain confidential family court material. It contains the lawful submissions, filings, and lived experiences of a party to multiple legal proceedings — including civil claims, safeguarding audits, and formal complaints. All references to professionals are strictly in their public roles and relate to conduct already raised in litigation. This is not a breach of privacy. It is the preservation of truth. Protected under Article 10 of the ECHR, Section 12 of the Human Rights Act, and all applicable rights to freedom of expression, legal self-representation, and public interest disclosure. To mimic this format without licence is not homage. It is breach. We do not permit imitation. We preserve it as evidence. This is not a blog. It is a legal-aesthetic instrument. Filed with velvet contempt. Preserved for future litigation. Because evidence deserves elegance, retaliation deserves an archive, and writing is how I survive this pain. Attempts to silence or intimidate this author will be documented and filed in accordance with SWANK protocols. © 2025 SWANK London Ltd. All formatting and structural rights reserved. Use requires express permission or formal licence. Unlicensed mimicry will be cited — as panic, not authorship.